Some of the problems that I have noticed in my own reading of a text is my ability to take what I am reading and only read it as black and white and not think about the deeper meaning or issue that is being presented. The relationship between Corinne and Oswald would seem like one that is between two people who are in love with each other and at times unable to share feelings with one another. The section on literature would also be a perfect example of how we can see the conversation between Corinne and the others as being prejudiced against another group of people. However, if we step back and analyze the text and think critically about the time period, we can see that there is more to this argument then just who is better and why. "On the whole our literature expresses little of our character and manners. We are too modest a nation, I might even say almost too humble, to venture to have our own tragedies, derived from our own history, or at least characteristic of our own feelings," how we interpret this quote largely depends on whether we reduce the meaning of this quote or not, and how it affects the reader(s) (118). If we take that thought process and only read a text through that lens, we begin to lose the deeper meaning behind the text and what it was intended to do. For example, we talked about the need for the text to be used as a guide for young women and how they should or should not act in public or perhaps as a guide for young women on what type of man she should be with based on Oswald. I believe that this is a way of reducing the text to what we think it means based on one reading and not taking a look at the text as a whole. Like the conversation between Corinne and Oswald, we can say that this is a basic debate between religions and what it means to be religious based on two different peoples opinions. Based on early conversations between Corinne and Oswald it is evident that they can't seem to come to an understanding for long, and where Corinne is concerned it is her basic understanding of the world around her that sets her apart from Oswald. Corinne, in my opinion, exudes plenitude by attempting to see religion from many different sides of the coin and this is evident when she questions religion in terms of its moral observance, and the feelings that would develop if our "principle aim was to stifle the heart's feelings" (178). She, unlike Oswald, is attempting to see beyond what is black and white. I believe that this is an attempt at challenging the act of reduction.
Like the conversation between Corinne and Oswald, we can say that this is a basic debate between religions and what it means to be religious based on two different peoples opinions. Based on early conversations between Corinne and Oswald it is evident that they can't seem to come to an understanding for long, and where Corinne is concerned it is her basic understanding of the world around her that sets her apart from Oswald. Corinne, in my opinion, exudes plenitude by attempting to see religion from many different sides of the coin and this is evident when she questions religion in terms of its moral observance, and the feelings that would develop if our "principle aim was to stifle the heart's feelings" (178). She, unlike Oswald, is attempting to see beyond what is black and white. I believe that this is an attempt at challenging the act of reduction.